Money collected from meter fees and tickets would double by 2016 under Cincinnati’s proposal to lease its parking system to the Port of Greater Cincinnati Development Authority in exchange for $92 million up front, new figures show.

The new financial details were disclosed in a 42-page document City Manager Milton Dohoney sent Friday afternoon to Mayor Mark Mallory and members of City Council.

The document, obtained by The Enquirer, was sent after some members of council demanded more details about the 30-year lease proposal before an expected budget committee vote Monday on turning control of the parking system over to the port authority and its four private-sector partners. The Enquirer also has requested details of the deal in open records requests.

In 2014, the first full year of the proposed deal, meter fees and ticket revenue are projected to increase from the current $7.3 million to $10.1 million. Projected revenue jumps to $12.7 million in 2015 and $14.3 million in 2016. By 2023, projected meter revenue is $19.1 million. And by 2043, the final year of the deal, meter revenue is estimated to be $29 million.

To hit the portion of 2014 revenue coming only from enforcement – $4.8 million – more than 107,000 tickets would have to be issued (and paid). That’s based on a standard parking ticket costing $45 under the agreement. The city hasn’t issued more than 100,000 tickets in a year since handing out 104,026 in 2008. That declined to 64,857 tickets in 2012.

City administrators say the city hasn’t fully maximized a valuable asset for years. And the would-be parking system operators say revenue will increase because the plan calls for extended hours to enforce meters, higher fines, more meters and significantly improved meter maintenance efficiency.

Critics, however, say the numbers show the private operators will aggressively issue parking tickets to meet their revenue projections.

“We’re talking about a massive increase in tickets for decades,” John Cranley, who is running for mayor, said Saturday. “It’s a 100 percent hidden tax increase on the citizens of Cincinnati.”

Port authority President and CEO Laura Brunner said: “It is the intent of the city (administration) that there will be more adherence to the law.”

“The city has approved these numbers,” she said. “There is not any motivation whatsoever for the operators to more aggressively enforce than what the city’s asking them.”

Under the proposal, the port authority would issue $127.65 million in tax-exempt bonds to finance the deal. The quasi-governmental agency, in partnership with the private companies – known as ParkCincy – would run city parking, including enforcement.

Besides the $92 million initial payment, the city gets $3 million a year. The money would balance the budget for two years and jump start projects ranging from a key freeway interchange to downtown housing and a grocery store to an East Side bike path

The deal needs City Council approval, and a full council vote could come Wednesday. The Enquirer reported Saturday that five of the nine council members appear likely to support the deal, which also pays the city $3 million a year. Dohoney has pushed for the deal to use the up-front money to cover the city’s budget deficit for two years and jump-start economic-development projects.

Four council members last week demanded the port authority and city administration disclose the bond document and other financial details.

Port authority and city administration officials had been reluctant to reveal financial details, fearing that even minor changes to the plan could mean millions added or lost, which might impact the bond rating.

Numbers will please, port authority CEO says

Brunner said the financial details provided to council will be used to draft the bond document and during the bond-rating process.

“Once they see the numbers, I think everyone’s going to feel good about this,” Brunner said. “We’re not secretly trying to raise money.”

Other financial details in the document include:

• The port authority projects to make $319,125 annually.

• ParkCincy’s asset manager, AEW, would make $400,000 a year.

• More than $230 million in meter and ticket enforcement expenses are projected to be paid during the life of the deal. That’s an average of almost $8 million per year. Currently, the city’s meter and enforcement expenses are $2 million.

• More than $225 million in debt service is projected.

The tax-exempt bonds, being underwritten by Wall Street investment firm Guggenheim, will be fully guaranteed by revenues generated from the parking meters, garages and fines, Brunner said. So if the bonds default, Guggenheim almost certainly would be on the hook for the shortfall, bond attorneys and public finance experts say.

“If it’s a true revenue bond, the investors take the risk,” said Steve Wyatt, chair of the department of finance in Miami University’s Farmer School of Business. “There’s no obligation to the taxpayers.”

However, Wyatt cautioned that it’s impossible to say for certain if taxpayers would be off the hook in a worst-case scenario without seeing details of the bond agreement.

ParkCincy’s plan is to establish a debt-service reserve fund and capital expenditure fund for garage and infrastructure improvement. That’s where $30.6 million from the bond issue will go after paying the city, according to the document. (The other $5 million is for legal and contract fees.)

“The only thing the bondholders get are the streams of revenue that have been specifically identified in the bond documents that they are entitled to,” said Susan Thomas, the port authority’s vice president of public finance. “In this case, it’s only revenues of the parking system.”

Thomas added that a “worst-case scenario” would be that Guggenheim could take ownership of a garage or garages to pay off the debt.

Cranley, a bond attorney, said the public most likely will not have to pay if the bonds default. But he says that part of the agreement is “totally irrelevant.”

Cranley says the public should be more concerned about how much control Guggenheim will have in the agreement. He believes Guggenheim, not the port authority, will be calling the shots on the city’s parking system – regardless if the investment firm is officially represented on the five-person advisory committee that will be making decisions.

Not the case, Brunner said.

“We will have control of the system,” she said.

The advisory committee will include the city manager (or a designee) and four port authority-appointed officials. At least one of those spots will be occupied by a member of AEW, Brunner said.

The advisory board will have the ability to raise rates beyond the capped 3 percent annual increase. That would require a unanimous vote of the advisory committee, then must be approved by the 10-member port authority board of directors, all of whom are appointed by the city and Hamilton County.

No elected officials will be on the advisory board. Port authority and city officials said in order for the bonds to be considered tax-exempt by the Internal Revenue Service, an elected official cannot be represented on the committee.

The port authority has pushed for the city’s parking system to maintain a local operator, and Brunner said the agency welcomed the city administration’s desire to be represented on the advisory board. In some cities that have privatized parking systems, there is no public representative on the oversight committee.

“We will be accountable,” said Brunner, a successful real-estate developer who is well-respected by political and business leaders. “There’s going to be a great deal of transparency.”